Taken from ‘Special Forces the U.S. Army’s Experts in Unconventional Warfare’ by C.B. Colby.
The type of warfare engaged in by the Special Forces requires something special in weapons as well. The new Colt AR-15, known as the M16, is just that. This weapon can be fired either semiautomatic (as fast as the trigger is pulled) or fully automatic (firing as long as the trigger is held back). It weights 6.31 pounds, which is very light for any weapon with its capabilities. Its cartridges are also very light, weighing 8 ounces for a full 20 rounds. The caliber is .223 (about as big as a .22 but many times more powerful) and the full-jacketed, boat-tailed bullets have a velocity of 3,250 feet per second. They can penetrate a car from rear to front, through bumper, trunk, back seat, front seat, fire wall and out the radiator. Not even the motor block of a vehicle will stop them. The M16 fires at the rate of 750 rounds per minute from bipod or shoulder. The muzzle does not rise when on fully automatic, and the weapon can fire various grenades 200 yards with ease. With a telescope sight it can fire all shots in a 12-inch bulseye at 500 yards. It can be fully dismantled with the tip of one of its own cartridges and its own firing pin. This is the weapon held by the man on the cover.
Never mind todays plastic/polymer cars; a 1960’s car? Really? Some propaganda.
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/thebuickotruth.htm
Umm, yeah. Not quite from front to rear, but it will go right through a thick, steel Buick from side to side.
Car doors are not bullet proof to even .22lr. (unless fired from the inside)
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/buickot3_2.htm
Back to the AR-15.
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/buickot4.htm
Not from front to rear, but certainly will penetrate through the door and be amply lethal.
Holy shit lol!
“The new Colt AR-15, known as the M16, is just that. This weapon can be fired either semiautomatic (as fast as the trigger is pulled) or FULLY AUTOMATIC (firing as long as the trigger is held back).” – Article
And from this, much misunderstanding is born.
What misunderstanding is that?
Hold on, I believe you mean the “AR-15, is the M16” confusion. Is this what you meant?
SSD so needs to set this car thing up. Put it to the test.
They were shooting at those old French cars in Indo-China. Not GTOs and so on.
“the muzzle does not rise when on fully automatic, and the weapon can fire various grenades 200 yards with ease. ”
Oh really??
Held properly it doesn’t rise all that much; you just have to have the nack for it. And yes, it did toss rifle grenades about 200yds. They weren’t used much at all since the M79(and later the M203) was in use, but they launched right off the flash hider with a grenade launching blank. I’ve done both.
I remember that line about thru the car. Loved those books while in elementary school.
Lucky if you can get a car to die with a fully magazine of green tip….. and what did they have back then 50gr ball ammo?
No, they had 55gr. FMJ-BT
The article is correct about the nomenclature. The earliest government issue rifles were, in fact, marked “AR-15.” The Lowe receiver has no service life, evidently, because I saw “AR-15” marked Colt lowers mated to new M-16A2 uppers in Afghanistan. The lower had the “AUTO” selector marking scratched out and the Air Farce armorers had electric pencilled “BURST” above the defaced original marking.
Air Force were the first to adopt the AR-15 in 1962. SecFo armorers have been maintaining, rebuilding, and bastardizing their original stock of full auto GAU-5 ‘s for more than 50 years.
I remember him visiting my elementary school as part of the book fair. I loved his books back then.
Thanks Eric, Where can i get one of those depleted uranium .223 rounds
You will not in the article it states “the bumper, trunk, rear seat, front seat, firewall, and out the radiator”. It does not mention the block until the next sentence. Meaning the first statement is a car without an engine. The next statement is dubious at best. Blocks back then were cast iron. I highly doubt a .223 would punch through.
When it comes to advertising, just a small adjustment in phrasing can make a statement seem to claim more than it does in reality. The bumper to bumper statement is proof of that. The omission of the engine block goes relatively unnoticed in the list, and adding it in the next sentence would make one think that the engine block was in the car. However, as separate statements, that does not have to be the case. It can mean the car and the engine block separately.
note*
“They can penetrate a car from rear to front, through bumper, trunk, back seat, front seat, fire wall and out the radiator. Not even the motor block of a vehicle will stop them.” I’d like to see that? I did witness 5.56 rounds deflect off a car’s front windshield glass in Iraq.
All this indicates is that we know a little bit more now than we did in 1965. The one things that hasn’t changed is that there isn’t a round yet made that won’t disappoint somebody, somewhere, sometime.
I loved C.B. Colby’s books and read all I could find at the local public and my elementary school library. They were already dated by the time I read them in the late 70s and early 80s but I loved all their military themes. I fear that in today’s public schools, they’d be considered too “warmongering” to ever be featured.